/v/ - Video Games

it's fucking video games, baby


New Reply
Name
×
Email
Subject
Message
Files Max 5 files32MB total
Tegaki
Password
Flag
[New Reply]


READ THE RULES


830f437a2d166f21794a52b7e5d5bae5177120a5d93ac7024a01ff376ff98055.jpg
[Hide] (81.7KB, 686x386) Reverse
Modern technology in gaming is such a farce if PS2 games looked like this, I don’t think we will ever see another jump in graphics as big as PS2 was
>>279990 (OP) 
It was strong enough  to do neat things but you still had to use tricks like nice texture work to make the most of it. It required you to give as much as you get which is why some games still look great on it.
Shenmue014.jpg
[Hide] (214.6KB, 1000x667) Reverse
Shenmue020.jpg
[Hide] (198.7KB, 1000x667) Reverse
10472182-metropolis-street-racer-screenshot-san-francisco.jpg
[Hide] (72.1KB, 640x480) Reverse
16599903-aerowings-dreamcast-free-flight-at-night.png
[Hide] (451.9KB, 640x480) Reverse
346448-gran-turismo-4-playstation-2-b-spec-mode-youre-the-navigator-con.jpg
[Hide] (73.8KB, 688x512) Reverse
Everyone talks about how "well" PS2 games still hold up in regards to their graphics, but I'd say that many Dreamcast games look better.

Although if you want "amazing" PS2 graphics, there's Gran Turismo 4 (Fifth pic).
ehhhhhhhhh.jpg
[Hide] (43.9KB, 1024x1024) Reverse
>half the ganados at any time as GC version
Replies: >>280097 >>280171
ClipboardImage.png
[Hide] (1.6MB, 1280x720) Reverse
>>279990 (OP) 
Look at those lawn clowns! To get a jump as big as the from early 3D graphics to advanced 3D graphics in the early 2000s the 6th generation would have had to be skipped. 

>>279994
Dreamcast and PS 2 games do hold up, because the design of game worlds has been figured out at the time. This longevity also came with a ton of compromises and tricks. Shenmue for example could only consist of a hamlet and a ware house.
>>279994
PS2 Games only hold up if you cherry pick, and happen to basically just pick the best looking games stylistically. hardware wise ps2 is what we should have stayed for a few more years than we should have.
But instead we get  graphics whoring and muh realism.

>>279990 (OP)  (OP) 
>brown and grey
FaggotFaggotFaggotFAGGOOOOOOOTTT
Replies: >>280053 >>280057
97c033131a1a18889c86be74ada65f4c91bb1f45ee4e2e40e4eda7ac110f1a02.jpg
[Hide] (74.5KB, 500x347) Reverse
>>279994
>>280002
>>280008
Every good game ever made still "holds up", because only a casual faggot would be swayed away from playing a good game because of low-poly graphics.
If a game was bad then, it still bad now, and if a game was good then, it's still good now.
Replies: >>280055
>>280053
>Hurrdurr good game
Way to miss the point Dexter, The whole argument from OP besides being a faggot was that ps2 games looked good enough which is not true. Modern games completely dropped art styles to sell to more retards.
>Modern games all rook the same unress they japanese which I mean not capcomnese or square anese
7f44b6272f606115bd4d64b649ca55f0c9737f8defa67d429b27e5ba73678477.jpg
[Hide] (144.8KB, 800x1200) Reverse
>>280055
>that ps2 games looked good enough which is not true
They did though.
Replies: >>280060
>>280008
>PS2 Games only hold up if you cherry pick
most PS2 games look good, this include some games from the Simple series.
a5060d12db4ae4bcc535863e9aff6f2dcef75aeee8a9fef7230ff83d5963129d.png
[Hide] (1.4MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
96120c77a47a6a2102423deaa326b59e9855d87377fe0592a54102db4d9fae9d.png
[Hide] (4.1MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
27e6a063b8d9d5fe7b9d20b4802126ec93b236f05045ac1122fb71840bd725d2.png
[Hide] (4.5MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
c838569273dbcf46df8d0a70444db583208db843649706e98a87b515bfa7060b.png
[Hide] (4MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
>>280056
バカな
2653741-9613964895-bljm61105_s06.jpg
[Hide] (447.1KB, 967x544) Reverse
2788650-vljm35262_s01.png
[Hide] (375.4KB, 640x363) Reverse
2799801-var_nov202015_13.jpg
[Hide] (554.9KB, 967x544) Reverse
7009379.jpg
[Hide] (515.8KB, 967x544) Reverse
7936085.jpg
[Hide] (436.2KB, 967x544) Reverse
>>280055
>Modern games all rook the same unress they japanese which I mean not capcomnese or square anese
No, a lot of them also look the same. Modern vidya only has a handful of art styles. Although that's arguably always been the case And there's nothing wrong with that. The ISSUE today is that a lot of games look little to no different that games on the PS3/360/Vita. Which brings forward the question people have of wondering why these games then proceed to run so terribly on modern devices.
<For example, try to tell me which console(s) the games you see in the screenshots were released on.
Replies: >>280066
>>280060
Looks pretty good. What's the problem, ching chong?
Replies: >>280068
87389a69c2411e4b16a20fe1554524c74eb33e923653362b3bd42046a70635de.png
[Hide] (457.9KB, 869x694) Reverse
>>280060
Looks alright, even the bottom of the barrel shovelware like ninhaza has a certain graphical charm.
2ea1aa0e8da8123f957009274c9abeb4aac693acb0710c964fde516dea723012.jpg
[Hide] (217.6KB, 1024x1024) Reverse
>>280002
Many PS2 games (not every PS2 game) still hold up because even when they were attempting to parrot realism, they were still using stilized graphics to get around the hardware limitations. (see the MGS games)
It must be said, that CRT TVs helped to hide low-res textures and make everything look more homogeneous compared to when you play them on a modern HD screen.
>>280060
The Onechanbara games looked very good on the PS2 despite being budget titles.
They almost look like something Tecmo would make, if only were more polished.
The Earth Defence Force games look pretty good too.
Replies: >>280066
11019121.jpg
[Hide] (380.1KB, 967x544) Reverse
11027299.jpg
[Hide] (563.9KB, 967x544) Reverse
18577357.jpg
[Hide] (552.4KB, 967x544) Reverse
19835574.jpg
[Hide] (460.3KB, 967x544) Reverse
20069309.jpg
[Hide] (510.9KB, 967x544) Reverse
>>280055
>>280061
<And here's a few games released "this decade" (The 2020's).

>>280065
>It must be said, that CRT TVs helped to hide low-res textures and make everything look more homogeneous compared to when you play them on a modern HD screen.
I've never really seen "low rez" textures as much of a problem with a lot of games.
t. someone who plays sixth gen games all on HDTVs.
Replies: >>280068
R&3_Cherrypickings.png
[Hide] (2.7MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
R&C3_Cherrypickings2.png
[Hide] (3.1MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
magic_dead_people_crosshair.png
[Hide] (2.4MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
oshimata.png
[Hide] (1.9MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
silen_tu.png
[Hide] (2.2MB, 2560x1440) Reverse
>>280062
PS3 was an actual upgrade that was worthwhile  and we didn't need much more than that.
>they downgraded siren as a whole to appease to westerners

>>280066
I don't mind it at all. but people who say that we never needed more than ps2 are obnoxious faggots. Did the ps2 have Great games? Yes did it have plenty of games Yes. 
But I would kill to get those budget games back today with modern hardware that aren't just trashy porn games someone charges 1000 yen for on dlsite.
Replies: >>280070 >>280106
967546_front.jpg
[Hide] (953.9KB, 1000x1246) Reverse
68076_front.jpg
[Hide] (36KB, 283x516) Reverse
13578_front.jpg
[Hide] (84.2KB, 640x908) Reverse
17966_front.jpg
[Hide] (95.9KB, 640x908) Reverse
877357_front.jpg
[Hide] (226.8KB, 1204x1500) Reverse
>>280068
>but people who say that we never needed more than ps2 are obnoxious faggots
Why? I have to admit that I am one of "those people", but my reason for the argument stems from the fact that it seems like games were doing a lot more with their technology during the sixth gen than almost any games in the past decade.

And yes, I know, the games now have a higher resolution and shinier graphics, but is that it? Does anyone remember that the PS3 and 360 were selling themselves on games running at 1080p and/or 60 FPS? And to this fucking day, games now stuggle with trying to achieve that (Forget 4k and 120 fps) for "some" reason. Does no one else see the irony of Ubisoft remaking Test Drive Unlimited, or trying to treat it as "amazing" that No Man's Sky is the "first" game that allowed you to freely explore an entire planet and space?
Replies: >>280072 >>280074
>>280070
>Why?
Because fundamentally it's at fault with developers and retarded suits who are chasing money. Video games had to sell themselves by making something that showed the potential IN THE PAST.
Once they figured out how to  milk idiots for every penny they just stopped innovating unless it came to milking a already dead cow.
>Anything that could be innovated is simply just casualized even further
Simply it's like comparing Youtube in it's golden age to today Objectively speaking Youtube is garbage now despite being technically better even if you can find a few good videos.

Video games aren't getting any better except for being easily consumed garbage that you could do without thinking.
>>280070
I was really looking forward to games utilizing the massive boost in processing power to add more:
Physics. - For a while they did, but now games have zero physics. We can simulate air pressure and water dynamics at a functional level with minimal hit to the frame rate, yet no game does this.

Reactive AI. - I mean more in the sense that the AI acts dynamically, can adjust to modified terrain or circumstances. Or even AI that lived their lives without you being around. There were tons of tech demos showing off this, but it almost never was implemented in any game. Modern AI is totally brain dead.

Massive crowds. - I know the PS2 could handle this but at a severe frame rate loss or quality loss. Other than a few obscure games made by a tiny team, EDF is really the only game that takes advantage of this. There's AssCreed but the AI only walks in a pattern.

Destructible terrain - This is a big one for me ever since PhysX. Some games let you destroy EVERYTHING, which is what I want. I want holes in the ground, holes in trees, holes in walls. I want to level a building. Battlefield 4 and Red Faction was kind of the last big budget game to do this. There are at least a few games now made by small teams that have destructible terrain. Now games won't even let you destroy glass bottles. Where is Blast Corps 2?

Frame rate - We have more than enough power to do anything without dropping below 60 frames per second. Yet games are less optimized and run worse than ever.

Graphics - Somehow graphics have all been getting worse looking. Both in a technical sense and in terms of art style. I guess they want to make things look photo realistic, but they fail every time and it just ends up looking blurry, hazy, and de-saturated without anything interesting to look at. There's also things like no more reflections in games, or dynamic lighting, or MSAA. Look at any modern remake of an old game and it somehow looks ten times worse. We're supposed to be looking at cool, interactive, crazy alien worlds where our imagination is the limit. But instead every game looks like a mess. It's a joke.
Replies: >>280076 >>280077
doa3.png
[Hide] (429.8KB, 1400x788) Reverse
ngbx2.jpg
[Hide] (393.5KB, 1707x960) Reverse
pdo.jpg
[Hide] (136.1KB, 1200x675) Reverse
The original Xbox had better graphics than the PS2. I'd say that was a bigger jump, if not maybe the Dreamcast, like >>279994
said.
Replies: >>280082 >>280105
>>280074
>Destructible terrain
Only two real games I can think of in recent year ignoring that indie sandbox, The Finals which yeah probably is unplayable because cheaters and the new DK game at least from what I seen.
>Massive crowds & Graphics & physics
This simply goes against what normalfags want out of games they want realism and aren't willing to give it up even if latency is garbage.  
>the rest
Simply these weren't prioritized because they didn't make more money. And added to the budget not making more money besides you can trick people into thinking they're playing a higher frame rate by faking it.
As long as you can fake a video game why would you go out of your way to make an actual game?
>>280074
Yeah, I agree with these points. Back in the day I was excited for higher draw distances and more objects on screen. Now we have empty, bland expanses filled with clutter that can be seen for miles and I feel foolish.
We really thought things could only get better, and there's populations of suckers who believe it does.
if you do not think that ayytracing is best thing ever without really even understanding it you are blind and stupid
>>280078
>if you do not think that ayytracing is best thing ever without really even understanding
I "understand" it. However that doesn't change the fact that raytracing is an absolute useless waste of resources. It adds absolutely nothing to every single game that has used it.
Replies: >>280080 >>280294
>>280079
It does add to minecraft despite being ironically the worst game to add to it. Not that you would actually play with it on since it makes playing the game worse.
8487724.jpg
[Hide] (30KB, 444x380) Reverse
>>280002
>FIFA
To be fair, I don't think FIFA's a good representative of modern graphics since they stagnated more than most franchises, just look at something like PES 2018 or PES 2019 and compare it, the player anatomy, faces and movement, also the lighting, EA never bothered to get it truly right like Konami did at many points, until they killed off PES at least, which is still a bummer.
>>280075
When I saw a Dreamcast game for the first time the graphics blew me away. I wanted one more than anything. Even when the PS2 was being shown off I still wanted a Dreamcast. Although the demo kiosks they had for the PS2 did make the games look nice. They used some special CRT monitors that have a nice soft glow to them. When you actually played them at home they looked worse.
>>280078
All this raytracing and games still don't have the atmosphere of F.E.A.R. or REmake. What's the point? That's a rhetorical question, btw. I know it's to do less work and tell the goyim to buy new hardware to compensate for the dev's lack of effort.
zeebo.jpg
[Hide] (7.7KB, 480x360) Reverse
>>279995
Could be worse. You could have been a BR huemonkey stuck with a Zeebo.
Replies: >>280140
Graphical quality is very noticeably better now compared to the PS4 generation. Many people simply have muddled perspectives due to their game choice (as well as the "PC effect" freezing them to their current hardware for a very long time.)
The TX image compared to Tales of Arise is a good example, but you can even just compare Trails of Cold Steel to Daybreak now...that is within the same company, and a notably low-spending company at that.
Atlus games have seen an extreme improvement in graphical quality as well.
SE's work in VII Remake is also the peak of realism for characters, quite easily. Amusingly, people took umbrage at environmental details etc. for these titles...the same people who ask for "stylization" which is very much "prioritization." 
Realistically, you will never please the current "crowd", and they will always be 5-10 years behind on hardware, as well as TV, monitor, etc. 
The meme of "gaming monitors" is quite grim in general, see picture processing etc. But I am sure you can configure one well enough if you know enough, but almost no one knows enough.
Replies: >>280501
>>280075
>The original Xbox had better graphics than the PS2
Back then i picked a PS2 over the XboX because of its better catalog of games, but every time i looked at the OG XBOX games they blew me away.
If could have gotten a PS2 and a XBOX both i would have.
I generally think that xbox is garbage and the 360 might be the most overrated console ever (alongside the Wii maybe) but OG XBOX was really cool.

No idea why Tecmo didn't port the original Dead Or Alive trilogy + 4 on every platform at this point.
At the time, the games that really interested me from the OG XBOX were the DOA games, Ninja Gaiden, and very little else.
40b2c1c1b735c29edc4ad01e168bde79ace2fa13bfa68f71ec05d6947517efab.jpg
[Hide] (69.9KB, 1056x720) Reverse
>>280068
>and we didn't need much more than that.
>but people who say that we never needed more than ps2 are obnoxious faggots
What is this gay "we don't need more than this level of graphics" anyways?
The new DOA Xtreme game wouldn't have been possible to be fully realized on the 6th or 7th gen, so I'm glad games didn't just stop evolving after those gens for whatever reason. Still, I never look at a PS2 game and think "Man, I wish this game had better graphsecs".
Most new games look like shit simply because new developers suck. Simple as that.
>>280055
>Way to miss the point Dexter
So this is a wumao
Replies: >>280113
>>280106
Greater detail requires exponentially bigger time and money investment with quickly diminishing returns.
Replies: >>280110
>>280108
That's true, but I think that, even if those hardware limitations were still present, the culture that inspired that golden age of games is gone. If devs still had the talent of olden, then they would use this new technology to their benefit. More AA games and indies that rival the quality of those old games would come out. Instead, they rarely do.
Replies: >>280136
>>280107
I don't even speak of a bit of ching  chong so I have no idea what you are talking about.

>>280106
Pushing graphics ultimately means less games and less risk saying games should be stuck to the pre hd era is retarded.
>New DOA Xtreme
>released on both PS4 and PS5 Not even possible to buy without a VPN on steam
<so you can get banned from steam for just buying a dating simulator 
I completely forgot about this since there is 0 gameplay.
Replies: >>280115 >>280116
a5e9e34c26fa53cbbb20c8d18b3a72698df86a4beb82bca46ec82437de93b680.jpg
[Hide] (361.4KB, 2560x1440) Reverse
>>280113
>saying games should be stuck to the pre hd era is retarded.
I agree.
>I completely forgot about this since there is 0 gameplay.
It's actually a visual novel + Pokemon Snap gameplay with a very in-depth photograph system, as well as sprinkled minigames here and there, and outfit customization.
It's way more in-depth than you average visual novel, and the visuals are breath taking. Fully rigged and highly detailed 3D models, viewable from every angle, instead of your usual .pngs.
I plan to make a thread about it once I 100% it.
Replies: >>280116
932349-wall_fire.jpg
[Hide] (106.3KB, 1024x576) Reverse
2073753-6869shop_01__us__copy.jpg
[Hide] (292.3KB, 1280x720) Reverse
2270632-600136_10150993227676785_1461255238_n.jpg
[Hide] (88.3KB, 960x540) Reverse
12301069-uncharted-2-among-thieves-playstation-3-jokes-are-on-the-level-w.jpg
[Hide] (94.6KB, 1200x675) Reverse
15636577-bayonetta-windows-luka.png
[Hide] (945.3KB, 1200x675) Reverse
>>280106
>>280113
>>280115
I think a lot of people tend to forget how detailed a game could be regarding the in-game character models during the seventh gen. Game graphics pretty much "peaked" around 2010-2012. Sure, they've since gotten higher screen resolution, high polygon counts, and high quality textures, but have the games themselves gotten better?
Replies: >>280121 >>280126
>>280116
>secon pic
What game?
Replies: >>280124
>>280121
final fantasy xiii
>>280116
Graphically? Hardly. Maximum peak would be according to my opinion Doom eternal with ID tech 6's capacity to render a 1000 different decals  plus the ones that are going to get sprayed on the wall as soon rip a demoniac's head off. Now we are at the point that some scenes in a Yakuza game look spectacular, because there are hundreds of pedestrians that look as good Ichiban's party walking around.
Replies: >>280132
12558361.jpg
[Hide] (151KB, 1200x675) Reverse
4154572.jpg
[Hide] (146.3KB, 1200x675) Reverse
7056234.jpg
[Hide] (115KB, 1200x675) Reverse
4155604.jpg
[Hide] (127.8KB, 1200x675) Reverse
4165745.jpg
[Hide] (188.2KB, 1200x675) Reverse
>>280126
>Now we are at the point that some scenes in a Yakuza game look spectacular, because there are hundreds of pedestrians that look as good Ichiban's party walking around.
<Okay, quick quiz, which of these screenshots is taken from the PS3 version of a Yakuza game, the PS4 version, and the PS5 version.
Replies: >>280134 >>280141
>>279994
A huge consideration that sets them apart even farther is how games today with good graphics are typically very mechanically simplistic. Most modern games that have any complexity to them are typically made by amateurs and using a retro style or have very generic engine default graphics. The games that people use as examples of modern good graphics typically have brain dead AI, No physics objects, 1 or very few characters at a time. 

When you consider this kind of stuff, it raises a bar for newer games that they already can’t reach. 
I tried explaining this to a normalnigger trying to tell me games look better now than ever, and further advancements would be superfluous. 
He is also confused how stuff like minecraft is so popular (with kids, why arent they impressed by graphics?)
I tried explaining how the future of games would be maintaining good graphic fidelity while also increasing the complexity of the games. He couldn’t imagine a game more complex than a modern third person shooter, and when I told him deus ex is more complex he said “yea but that had simpler graphics’ I said yea but at the time it was advanced. So he said “yea, exactly so they couldn’t do it back then either “
I swear every time I talk to normalniggers I understand why they should all be living in a pod, eating bugs, and playing AI generated games. They’d do it too as long as the graphics were shiny.
Replies: >>280144 >>280145
>>280132
Uh: 3, and 4 are PS3 because of the fingers and compression on BG textures, 1 is PS4 because the R2 icon, and 5 is PS5?
Replies: >>280142
>>280110
What are you talking about, anon?
Wr now have a million battle royale clones, that was impossible before modern tech! Battlefield 1942, Planetside
And dont forget about a billion vampire survivors clones! Who could handle this many actors on screen before? serious sam
Replies: >>280137
Minecraft_Browser_Griefing.mp4
[Hide] (3.1MB, 480x360, 01:03)
>>280136
As far as I remember Classic Minecraft also had a large player amount but I cannot find anything on it because search results are shit and we're talking about something from ages ago.
>Video is still on youtube probably due to obscurity
>>280097
>BR huemonkey stuck with a Zeebo.
What do those words mean?
>>280132
>mixing bullshots with real screenshots
Eat shit faggot.
>>280134
Here are the answers:
<First pic: Yakuza 6, PS4
<Second pic: Yakuza 5, PS3
<Third pic: KIwami, PS4 version
<Fourth pic: KIwami, PS3 version
<Fifth pic: Yazkua 0, PS3 version
>>280133
They want to be passively entertained, not actively. They don't care that it is completely contradictory for a game. At best gaming is "choose your own adventure" for them.
>>280133
Additionally, a lot of devs have been pushed out of complex gameplay because you can't sell a user experience once it gets too complex.
The possibility of things like softlocking, speedrun/glitching/bypassing, or any number of other things are poison to "decision makers." Also, power fantasy type games are basically banned unless you pass the tranny dicksuck gating. The cattle are NOT allowed to think themselves out of the pen ever again.
Replies: >>280152
>>280145
Complexity can be in the world, and usually was. Not just in the actual gameplay. You can make a racing game where you hold a button and turn insanely complex by adding advanced lighting, driver AI, weather/physics, momentum, realistic damage models, temperature/tire simulation, weather, reflections, etc. 
alot of old games had very complex things going on in the world that many players never really noticed.
These same people wonder why they cant get into newer games, or why theyre not as immersed in spite of the upgrade.
>>279995
Reasonable. Mind that they also needed to slash the difficulty down to PS2 userbase standards.
Broken_Arrow_-_Special_Forces_Trailer.webm
[Hide] (28.3MB, 1280x720, 02:35)
>Small open world with lots of detail, content and verticality > Huge empty open world
>Less impressive visuals with tons of stuff happening > Impressive visuals with barely any dynamic events
Graphicsfags need a bullet to the head
Replies: >>280326
812a8f2e939ca17808b62cd04be7e26ac1f5eaae08e36dda214706d84ba7c92d.jpg
[Hide] (68KB, 700x576) Reverse
>>280078
<if you do not think that ayytracing is best thing ever without really even understanding it you are blind and stupid
>>280079
>I "understand" it. However that doesn't change the fact that raytracing is an absolute useless waste of resources. It adds absolutely nothing to every single game that has used it.

I am pretty sure that guy was being sarcastic, i mean "you are stupid if you don't think ayytracing is the greatest thing ever even if you don't understand it" seems a pretty obvious jab at normalfags who bitch and moan about games not having raytracing even if they really don't have idea of wtf it is, as they just think "new thing that makes things better".
Replies: >>280317
anti-soul_gas_1745613545029952.webm
[Hide] (3.8MB, 1920x1080, 00:04)
The main thing old games lacked is polygon counts, high resolution textures, and ability to render more lights/shadows with higher detail. Ability to calculate more things like higher number of particles or volumetric effects was also a limitation but probably not as needed.

All of those shortcomings have been fixed thanks to more powerful hardware (and some inventions like clustered shading), but due to a combination of incompetence and marketing greed, developers botch the result. A great example of incompetence is the anti-soul gas that is present in every AAA game now. The primary example of marketing is ray-tracing which hardware isn't powerful enough to do properly yet, so they use temporal algorithms (time-based accumulation over multiple frames, usually with slight variations between each frame) which look like absolute vomit in motion due to ghosting and jittering. To cap it off, games run so fucking badly (in part thanks to shitty unreal engine movie tech that sucks for videogames, in part because of the ray-tracing greed) that GPUs are now using AI to poorly upscale the game since it can't be rendered at full resolution.

There's nothing wrong with ray tracing as a technology, but even ignoring the shitty temporal algorithms, it makes developers lazy and allows corporations to hire less competent people because they start using ray tracing in their engine to automatically solve lighting and graphics instead of using skilled art direction to make things look good, which almost always results in a worse and more boring/soulless looking game.
Replies: >>280567
>>280294
>I am pretty sure that guy was being sarcastic
Who can honestly tell anymore? Especially when you have people that repeat thetoric like that unironically.
>>280286
>Modern warfare
>not ONE drone
Have nobody learn anything from hohol special operations?
Replies: >>280353 >>280582
>>280326
There are recon and CAS drones, no suicide ones though.
>>280103
>Graphical quality is very noticeably better now compared to the PS4 generation
Nah. It's not even better compared to PS3.
Replies: >>280601
1461943230031-4.gif
[Hide] (489.2KB, 628x452) Reverse
>>280305
It's worse than you think. Apparently Unity's High Definition Render Pipeline is so badly designed that it's constantly trying to use hardware raytracing even if your GPU doesn't support it and regardless of whether the game itself actually uses hardware raytracing at all. This incurs a performance hit on all hardware and can only be disabled through a config file edit or editing HDRP's source code (I've been informed by a fellow /agdg/fag that the editor toggle for disabling its raytracing functionality literally does not work), so of the 327 games SteamDB automatically recognises as using HDRP, a majority of these probably run a bit shittier than they should purely thanks to Unity doing completely unnecessary calculations as a fuck-you to anyone who owns a pre-RTX/RDNA2 GPU or develops a game without raytracing.
Developing a Unity game (let alone a HDRP game) sounds like pure suffering and I never want to touch that shitass engine in my life. Unityfags always say that the engine allows you to work pretty fast, but then they spend so much time complaining about the ridiculous bullshit and unfixed bugs they have to work around that you get the impression any team making anything substantial in Unity spends more time fighting with the engine than making their game.
>>280567
>trying to use hardware ray tracing even if your GPU doesn't support it
Wtf
38de3744aaf53f8aea0d1cb378b0f929fdf69bb923998682da81f0569a8d9e0a.jpg
[Hide] (99.1KB, 1097x805) Reverse
>>280567
>Unityfags always say that the engine allows you to work pretty fast
Then, what other choices are even there? Unreal? That's probably more bloated. Godot? That's open source tranny jank.
Replies: >>280582 >>280588
>>280577
Redot, Gamemaker and pygame CE. ID Tech Gorillion - Giga shlong and balls whenever Bethesda feels desperate enough to actually sell it. 

>>280567
> Developing a Unity game (let alone a HDRP game) sounds like pure suffering and I never want to touch that shitass engine in my life. Unityfags always say that the engine allows you to work pretty fast, but then they spend so much time complaining about the ridiculous bullshit and unfixed bugs they have to work around that you get the impression any team making anything substantial in Unity spends more time fighting with the engine than making their game.
Now I know why some porn games run like ass. Adding forced raytracing is the dumbest thing I have ever heard coming from Unity. Its bad enough that you can write your garbage in fucking Javascript. Its even worse that it enables coomer and Jeets to slap together a scene you can walk around in with a bunch of animations, some shit looking menus and call that a complete product. 

>>280326
Before they learn anything about penetrant drone warfare from the Russians, the US will be 5 years behind. Don't put your hopes and dreams of realism into what is essentially US propaganda.
>>280577
Just use Godot because Unity also has/had licensing issue scandal fuck.
054e9980431b1f72ed1f25e3c6956d6e814a4cb97e744af068cf57253b3d779c.png
[Hide] (228.3KB, 396x458) Reverse
>>280501
>Nah. It's not even better compared to PS3.
Man, i recently played Dead Space 2 on the PS3 and i was amazed by how good it looked, even compared to current gen shit.
Same thing with GoW: Ascension.
Normalniggers seems to think that 4K and raytracing can polish a turd.
Replies: >>280610
231105-2327.mp4_snapshot_22.04.602.png
[Hide] (3.2MB, 1920x1080) Reverse
250518-1953-1.mp4_snapshot_29.21.082.png
[Hide] (1.7MB, 1280x720) Reverse
231113-0001.mp4_snapshot_19.48.978.png
[Hide] (3MB, 1920x1080) Reverse
250518-2052.mp4_snapshot_01.18.925.png
[Hide] (1.2MB, 1280x720) Reverse
>>280601
It was a mixed bag. For example, here's screenshots of an open-world racing game and a futuristic third-person shooter both captured on my PS3. Not saying "every" game looked excellent, but a lot of them were decent. At the very "worst" just looking like a late original Xbox game.
preorder.webm
[Hide] (683.8KB, 460x248, 00:20)
>>279990 (OP) 
The issue isn't technology, but capitalism.
Games nowdays spend the minimum efforts working on the gameplay, plot, characters, replayability, etc and instead throw fancy colors and skins at you hoping it will make you stick and pay more.

Back then they paid devs to spend a lot of time polishing stuff to create sovlful games with what limited ressources they had.
Look at Doom and the frugal design (Quake proved that even the devs believed they urgently needed to go true 3D to make good games), Portal, FF and Tifa's triangular tits, fucking Spyro had a skateboarding minigame, Dark Souls was clunkier than fucking DMC3 yet it was a massive hit. It was all about ideas and originality, not convincing the execs that your idea would be easy to market to ADHD kids. Assassin's Creed 2 was a harmonious marriage between good ideas and good implementation. 
Does anybody remember Crysis ?

Look at fucking Minecraft.
Technology has nothing to do with it.

The gayming industry was less saturated so there was more room for daring ideas.
Replies: >>281257
>Dead Space 2
>God of War
No wonder you people are disappointed by graphical quality, that is extremely grim.
gamerfood.png
[Hide] (296.8KB, 1064x698) Reverse
>>280567
>Unity doing completely unnecessary calculations as a fuck-you to anyone who owns a pre-RTX/RDNA2 GPU or develops a game without raytracing
>disabling its raytracing functionality literally does not work
It makes one wonder, who could possibly be behind such an odd technical decision?

>>281231
>Back then they paid devs to spend a lot of time polishing stuff
Tried Soma and I was amazed by how immersive it was. It clearly had soul, craftsmanship to it that is missing in modern slop. The game is 10 years old and my memories of the intro sequence in that small apartment alone blow Starfield out of the water. Meaningful objects that tell me about the character instead of shallow asset spam, a hidden news clipping I found was actually a main story plotpoint which was rewarding and interesting, I had fun with the lights opening and closing the curtains, the effect on the bathroom window pane was beautiful. I kept fucking around but there was no objective hint, no markers, no "huh I should find the thing" line, the game let me be which was refreshing and engaging.
Same for Max Payne, Spliter Cell they have unique direction, mechanics, world, artstyle, feel and detail while modern games tend to have quantity over quality world and shallow quests which don't stand up to scrutiny, streamlined handholding gameplay and bland woke cutscenes.
>Assassin's Creed 2 was a harmonious marriage between good ideas and good implementation
Crowbcat's videos floored me, the Dead Rising demake, the Oblivion artists going out looking at moss and stone for inspiration, compare that to Bungie who keeps ripping artwork from Twitter artists with no recourse. The soulful artists and programmers must be out there, employed to churn out massive amounts of fast random AI slop and barely functional code slop. Best case they make a potato indie game with raw gameplay or they pull off the odd Nobody Wants to Die which flops. Fuck retarded normies.
Replies: >>282590
650684010000000120.jpg
[Hide] (39.4KB, 142x251) Reverse
The 6th generation was the peak of graphical fidelity before whatever change in the 7th generation occurred for everything to look like claymation. Why do people care if something is in-engine when pre-rendered backgrounds and modeling produced more beautiful aesthetics? Is it because techbro obsession with graphics or the contrast of switching back to the lackluster engine appearance; The FMVs in the Stalker trilogy were a peek of the future we never got. Sorry if you don't know what I mean because I don't know anything about computer technology.
Replies: >>282704
e4f20a77419168c8b119db46ec4e5205733b2768c03206945b23a0293207af13.mp4
[Hide] (3.1MB, 720x1280, 00:13)
kinda impossible to discuss this with almost anyone nowdays as games today just look out of place and overall a mess, the old ones are uniform and clear, pretty much all that makes graphics actually good
Replies: >>282569
>>282548
What is the relevance of the weird duck video?
Replies: >>282587
>>282569
i am big fan of ducks
>>281257
damn it's been 15 years since i saw this pic, thank you.

notice how faggy everything about gaming and graphics has become since. $2000 for a graphics card goy!
>>282547
Uhhhh something something muh HD buy moar graphics to run mature games for mature gamers.
The end of the CRT age might've also played a part, tube funkyness made many prerendered BGs on pre-7th generation systems look downright gorgeous but once HDMI and LCD TVs rolled around in the mid to late 2000s those backgrounds now looked like a blurry pixelated mess, whereas in-engine cutscenes could be arbitrarily scaled to any resolution.
[New Reply]
76 replies | 68 files | 48 UIDs
Connecting...
Show Post Actions

Actions:

Captcha:

Select the solid/filled icons
- news - rules - faq -
jschan 1.4.1